Sales 2.0

I just read a post from the Sales Evolution blog that the Brooks Group Publishes.  It had to deal with the concept of “Sales 2.0” and what that term means.  I think about – actually obsess about – this concept a lot. 

Read the original article here, and check out my response to the post below:

I completely agree with this!  Sales 2.0 isn’t about getting cooler software that takes the relationship out of selling.  It is about enabling more connections and relationships through the technology.  The fundamentals of sales remain the same, there are just new ways of developing, nurturing and maintaining relationships in the digital age.  One example I have is that of CRM or sales tracking software.  There are many programs out there that have a TON of fields to fill out, awesome reports and all sorts of other “management” type features.  However, top sales people HATE taking 2 hours of their day to fill out little boxes just so management has a cool report to look at.  Our firm in particular uses ACT! for managing contacts.  In my opinion, asking a “Sales 2.0” person to use a program like ACT! is like asking a house builder to use a hammer to build an entire house.  Sure, you can do it, and it will work.  But isn’t using a nail gun and other power tools MUCH more effective?  Why not use programs like HighRise from 37Signals, or some of the newer, less bloated “Web 2.0” programs like BantamLive?  These programs incorporate only the features needed and nothing else.  They also incorporate some of this Sales 2.0 stuff like lead generation & development through Twitter & other social networking services. 

Sales isn’t changing.  Relationships and solution selling will always be here.  The WAY in which relationships are being built is what is changing.


2 responses to “Sales 2.0

  1. Bryan:

    Thanks for reading Sales Evolution!

    Reporting is definitely important because it helps companies get a sense for what’s coming. However, you are absolutely right: There should be a balance between reporting and “face-time.” And that balance should always tip toward time with customers.

    Jeb Brooks

  2. Agreed. However that face time might look. Even the notion of face time in some instances is changing as well I believe.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s